Margaret Cameron approved another delay Thursday, as lawyers review newly discovered evidence. (CBC)

The judge running Newfoundland and Labrador's breast cancer inquiry has dismissed a provincial government application that was widely criticized as an attempt to rein in the inquiry's work.

Justice Margaret Cameron in a written decision has rejected a government application for what it called "clarification" on the role of inquiry lawyers.

Cameron's decision was posted quietly on her commission's website, and she did not mention it publicly before the commission completed its work late Friday afternoon.

Provincial government lawyer Jackie Brazil made an unexpected appearance at the inquiry earlier this month, to ask Cameron to revisit her own rules on whether inquiry lawyers have the right to cross-examine witnesses.

The request was made several days after Premier Danny Williams accused lawyers of using "inquisitorial methods" and likened the inquiry to a "witch hunt." Williams later singled out lawyer Bern Coffey, who questions witnesses along with fellow co-counsel Sandra Chaytor.

Tone, style, cost questioned

Justice Minister Jerome Kennedy has also raised questions about the inquiry's tone, style and cost, and even suggested that if the inquiry continued in the same way that the health system could collapse.

Inquiry co-counsel Bern Coffey's questioning style has drawn criticism from Newfoundland and Labrador government officials. (CBC)

The comments and the government's application sparked a public outrage, with cancer patients especially pleading with the government to leave the inquiry alone. Opposition critics accused the government of interfering with a sitting public inquiry.

Cameron appeared visibly annoyed during Brazil's presentation earlier this month, especially when Brazil would not reveal who in particular instructed her to appear before the commission.

While the inquiry has begun looking at problems with the cancer testing process, much of its focus in its early weeks was on how government and Eastern Health officials responded to the crisis from 2005 to the present.

Cameron weighed the application as well as submissions by other lawyers with standing at the inquiry before handing down her seven-page decision, in which she summarily dismissed the government's arguments.

"It is clear that the concern of the applicant is not the right of Commission counsel to ask questions of a witness but the manner in which such questions are to be put, specifically, whether Commission counsel may ask leading questions," Cameron wrote.

Representing public interest

Cameron said inquiry lawyers are representing the public interest and that their role is neither partisan nor adversarial. She quoted case law that supports the view that counsel must be prepared to ask probing questions, especially when a witness's evidence is inconsistent or evasive.

"I agree with the applicant that all witnesses have a right to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect," Cameron wrote.

"However, I am unable to conclude that the use of leading questions in the examination of witnesses by Commission counsel undermines that right."

She further said the government's reasoning that a witness could not object to such questioning, and that "procedural fairness" would be denied, "is patently incorrect."

Danny Williams has been sharply critical of the tone and style of what he has seen at the Cameron inquiry. (CBC)

Cameron said any party with standing at the inquiry can object to questioning they find "repetitious, aggressive or confrontational."

Cameron noted that lawyers for the Canadian Cancer Society and for a pending class action lawsuit said it would be unfair for Cameron to change the rules midway through the inquiry, and thereby force them to carry the burden of cross-examining witnesses.

Williams and Kennedy made their comments shortly after Cameron asked for an extension to her commission, which did not start hearing evidence until March.

Last summer, Cameron was given a deadline of July 30. She has asked for an extension until Feb. 28. The government has not ruled on that bid.

The inquiry started about two months late because Eastern Health, whose hormone receptor tests and dealings with patients are at the heart of the inquiry, launched a failed application in Newfoundland Supreme Court to keep external reviews out of the public domain.

As well, the inquiry lost four days of testimony when government officials discovered dozens of documents and e-mails that had not been previously disclosed to the commission.

Ruling accepted, government says

An official with the Department of Justice said Friday night that the government was seeking clarification and that "the ruling provides that clarification."

Last week in the house of assembly, Williams said government would not pursue further action if it did not like Cameron's response for clarification.

"Once she makes her ruling, she will have the last word," Williams told the legislature.

The inquiry is investigating how a pathology lab in St. John's produced hundreds of inaccurate results for hormone receptor tests, which may have meant many breast cancer patients did not receive the best possible treatment. The tests are used to help determine whether a patient can benefit from antihormonal therapies, particularly Tamoxifen.